Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.
| Application Number | Title | Filing Date | Disposal Date | Disposition | Time (months) | Office Actions | Restrictions | Interview | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17134629 | MAGNETIC SHIELD FOR POSITION SENSOR | December 2020 | July 2024 | Abandon | 43 | 4 | 0 | No | No |
| 17126559 | PERMANENT MAGNET MOTOR, COMPRESSOR AND AIR CONDITIONER | December 2020 | February 2024 | Allow | 38 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17253624 | ROTATING ELECTRIC MACHINE | December 2020 | October 2023 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 17059553 | ROTOR UNIT, ELECTRIC MOTOR, AND ELECTRIC ACTUATOR | November 2020 | August 2024 | Allow | 44 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17096057 | ROTOR LAMINATION, ROTOR LAMINATED CORE, ROTOR, ELECTRIC MACHINE, AND VEHICLE | November 2020 | September 2023 | Allow | 34 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16982779 | ELECTRIC POWER STEERING DEVICE | September 2020 | August 2023 | Allow | 35 | 3 | 0 | No | No |
| 17022581 | ROTOR SYSTEM FOR PERMANENT MAGNET MOTORS POWERING ELECTRIC SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS | September 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 39 | 2 | 1 | No | No |
| 17010154 | SELF-ADJUSTING BUSHING BEARING WITH MAGNETIC LEVITATION | September 2020 | September 2024 | Abandon | 49 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
| 16969253 | ELECTRIC POWER STEERING APPARATUS | August 2020 | December 2023 | Allow | 40 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16869459 | AIR GAP MAGNETIC COUPLING WITH COUNTERBALANCED FORCE | May 2020 | March 2024 | Allow | 46 | 3 | 1 | Yes | No |
| 16864779 | MOTOR WITH SPRING-MOUNTED MOVABLE MOTOR PART AND PERSONAL CARE DEVICE COMPRISING SUCH A MOTOR | May 2020 | August 2023 | Allow | 39 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16472430 | ENERGY HARVESTING DEVICES AND SENSORS, AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USE THEREOF | June 2019 | July 2024 | Allow | 60 | 1 | 0 | No | No |
| 16257286 | BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR ACTUATOR SHAFTS | January 2019 | August 2023 | Allow | 55 | 2 | 0 | Yes | No |
No appeal data available for this record. This may indicate that no appeals have been filed or decided for applications in this dataset.
Examiner RODRIGUEZ, JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL works in Art Unit 2834 and has examined 13 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 84.6%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 40 months.
Examiner RODRIGUEZ, JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL's allowance rate of 84.6% places them in the 61% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.
On average, applications examined by RODRIGUEZ, JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL receive 2.00 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 47% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues fewer office actions than average, which may indicate efficient prosecution or a more lenient examination style.
The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by RODRIGUEZ, JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL is 40 months. This places the examiner in the 24% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.
Conducting an examiner interview provides a -7.5% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by RODRIGUEZ, JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL. This interview benefit is in the 5% percentile among all examiners. Note: Interviews show limited statistical benefit with this examiner compared to others, though they may still be valuable for clarifying issues.
When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 30.0% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 61% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.
This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 50.0% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 76% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner is highly receptive to after-final amendments compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 714.12, after-final amendments may be entered "under justifiable circumstances." Consider filing after-final amendments with a clear showing of allowability rather than immediately filing an RCE, as this examiner frequently enters such amendments.
Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 0.0% of allowed cases (in the 25% percentile). This examiner rarely makes examiner's amendments compared to other examiners. You should expect to make all necessary claim amendments yourself through formal amendment practice.
Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 18.2% of allowed cases (in the 94% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.
Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:
Not Legal Advice: The information provided in this report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with a qualified patent attorney or agent for advice specific to your situation.
No Guarantees: We do not provide any guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the statistics presented above. Patent prosecution statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data and are subject to data quality limitations, processing errors, and changes in USPTO practices over time.
Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances will IronCrow AI be liable for any outcome, decision, or action resulting from your reliance on the statistics, analysis, or recommendations presented in this report. Past prosecution patterns do not guarantee future results.
Use at Your Own Risk: While we strive to provide accurate and useful prosecution statistics, you should independently verify any information that is material to your prosecution strategy and use your professional judgment in all patent prosecution matters.